Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Eclipse Aviation furloughs employees

UPDATED 21.00hrs GMT

This from the inbox, giving us the 'official' text:-

Wednesday February 18, 2009

Eclipsers,We are sure that you have noticed that the sale of Eclipse Aviation is taking longer thanexpected. The efforts of many people to finalize the sale of Eclipse to EclipseJet is stillon course but slower than we all had hoped for. Even with the difficult financial marketsaround the world, all actions to date allow us to believe that the sale and closing of theoverall process is well within reach. In spite of this optimism, we now find it prudent totake action to provide us the best possible chance of assuring a sale closing occurs.

To make the company’s remaining cash last as long as possible and give us the most timeto complete the sale, the Board of Directors directed management to furlough essentiallyall of the company’s employees effective today. This means you can go home and unlessyou are asked, you should not report to work starting tomorrow, Thursday February 19,2009, until further notice.

You will receive Thursday’s paycheck as normally distributed for work through Saturday,February 14, 2009. It is our intention that all benefit coverage will remain in full effect. We regret the need to take this action but we ask that you see the necessity given thecircumstances. You will be contacted at your home address and/or by home phone tonotify you when to return to your job or to provide any additional updates.

While this is unpleasant and hopefully short lived, we are very thankful for all of theongoing support you are giving to Eclipse Aviation. We hope to have good news toreport to you in the coming days.

Roel PieperMark BorsethMichael McConnell

A sudden 'bloom' on the inbox always means big news out of ABQ. So it proved when I checked in this evening. At a meeting this morning, and via email for some, the staff were told of an immediate closure of the factory. Pay will be honored, but not for the past few days. As I get more detail I'll post it here, or as 'notice' on the blog.

The signs (behind the scenes) have been getting steadily worse for the past 10 days or so, with a number of missed deadlines in the Chapter 11 sales process. In the past few days, Roel has also gone 'walkabout', despite the crisis at the company. Various financial types have been deeply involved, trying to plot a way forward. I'd love to say more but I won't because today we need to think about the staff, their families and the supplier community.

I think I can speak for all of us 'critics' that this event, although long predicted, is not one that gives anyone a feeling of joy. My heart goes out to the breadwinner heading home to tell loved ones of hard times and disrupted lives and to the homemaker already struggling to stay upbeat in trying times.

One of the 'Honor Roll' has already offered help with those seeking jobs. I post his 'special purpose' address here, and will be happy to do so for others who's bona fides I'm happy with.

ColdWetMack@gmail.com

Coldwet (well known to all of 'us') is a solid professional, who will do all he can in the situation.

Every cloud has a silver lining, even if it seems bleak at present. Some suppliers are also in a very bad place, but can now at least move forward with other projects. Finally, it's almost inevitable that the next step will see the remaining stakeholders (owners, depositors and investors/lenders) left with little to feel cheerful about.

At least the speculation is coming to an end. One way or the other, this matter draws to a close.

JSFIRM.com has the most, but here is a list of contract houses. More to be added.

Shane, I'm also trying to set up a gmail account and will post it soon> (may need some help)

According to my former lead, they will get paid for the two weeks past, but he will confirm that tomorrow when he checks the bank.

I addition, since more the 300 were laid off it DOES fall under the Trade Agreement Act. For all those laid off, go to www.dol.gov for more on that...and I cannot emphasize enough...GO FILE UNEMPLOYMENT NOW!!!!!

Having been in this situation before (Start-up company running up against a funding deadline and laying everyone off), I can say that, it doesn't matter if you know it is coming, when it does it is still a very traumatic event to those on the receiving end.

It is like losing a loved one to a terminal illness. You know it is coming, but when it does it is very tough indeed.

Silver linings?

- I know this is a double-edged sword, but, given all the economic dislocations in our country these past 12-18 months, it is easier to communicate the event to family and friends. Even kids are more attuned to the issues around parents losing jobs.

- There are recent increases and expansion of unemployment benefits.

- There are still active aerospace programs and related industries hiring.

- Programs to help you modify mortgages dues to reduced income are starting in a big way on March 4.

- Despite all that you read/hear here and elsewhere, this is still the greatest country with the most dynamic economy in the world, and things will get better very soon and much better soon enough.

Take a few days (it is winter brake this week in many states), spend some quality time with your loved ones, then hit the pavement for better opportunities. They will be found.

Agree with eclipso - file for unemplyment right away (today). There is typically a lost week or two depending again on state regulations before you are technically 'eligible', so file right away and start that clock ticking.

Most states have a simple online system, all you need are start and termination dates, SSN, employer name, etc.

Be advised that for other than unskilled positions it will probably not be but a fraction of what you were making, but for engineers and designers it will probably get close to a mortgage payment. It takes a while to get processed, and I am unsure what the sitiation at EAC will do to making the determination.

rather than dying a slow expensive death with fixes etc difficult to get. perhaps what will happen to it as happened to the Aerostar years ago when Piper went bankrupt. A good small smart group of engineers bought all the rights to the PA 60 and for the last 15 years or so has taken good care of us owners. They do up grades as necessary, solutions to AD's, adding capability like the pressurization upgrade and gross weight increase, certifying new options etc. While it is not cheap to maintain an aerostar now (no more expensive than any other complex twin) the Parts and information have always been available. The major problem purchasing Eclipse now, is that whoever buys the rights to the Eclipse will need to spend the money to retrofit the avionics with G1000 or equivalent and separate out the other airframe control systems so they are more standard and easy to fix.

The Aerostar owners had real AOG problems until Aerostar aircraft bought all the rights the problems. but having a small smart dedicated group to solve the needs of the owners solved all the problems.

I said it before on the last thread, there may be a significant business opportunity in supporting the preemie jets but it will take among other things experienced leadership and a realistic business plan.

This will need input (and potentially good-paying work) from folks with experience in engineering, manufacturing and procurement at Eclipse.

Eclipsers, We are sure that you have noticed that the sale of Eclipse Aviation is taking longer than expected. The efforts of many people to finalize the sale of Eclipse to EclipseJet is still on course but slower than we all had hoped for. Even with the difficult financial markets around the world, all actions to date allow us to believe that the sale and closing of the overall process is well within reach. In spite of this optimism, we now find it prudent to take action to provide us the best possible chance of assuring a sale closing occurs.

To make the company’s remaining cash last as long as possible and give us the most time to complete the sale, the Board of Directors directed management to furlough essentially all of the company’s employees effective today. This means you can go home and unless you are asked, you should not report to work starting tomorrow, Thursday February 19, 2009, until further notice.

You will receive Thursday’s paycheck as normally distributed for work through Saturday, February 14, 2009. It is our intention that all benefit coverage will remain in full effect.

We regret the need to take this action but we ask that you see the necessity given the circumstances. You will be contacted at your home address and/or by home phone to notify you when to return to your job or to provide any additional updates. While this is unpleasant and hopefully short lived, we are very thankful for all of the ongoing support you are giving to Eclipse Aviation. We hope to have good news to report to you in the coming days. Roel Pieper Mark Borseth Michael McConnell

It sounds like Eclipse employees might not be eligible for unemployment since Eclipse isn't terminating them. I think this came up before when Eclipse furloughed employees and the Workforce Development head basically said that it was up to Eclipse to say whether those employees were eligible or not.

I find it hard to imagine a source of funds that didn't materialize in the months since filing, but can materialize as described in the email to employees.

Unless this is a term sheet condition issue that needs to be ironed out. Prime example would be a funding term sheet contingent on getting all suppliers on board, and one or two are still negotiating for better terms.

Still doesn't look good - apparently there is nothing related to Eclipse that is straightforward.

My experience with a failed company turned out to have been a big advantage in the long run. Those ex colleagues scattered through the industry are a wonderful network, the value of which raises with time.

Since I am only just starting to think about it myself I would be lying to suggest I have a plan.

But I will bet a dollar to a doughnut that the vendors, many of whom have not been paid in six or more months, have given it some thought - same goes for some of the non-executive leadership team, and some of the employees.

As Beedriver pointed out, and as I have even argued with Baron over before (he being pro, me not), there are examples where a group of former employees or dedicated customers have ponied up to buy the assets, such as they are, from the ashes - Aerostar, Twin Commander and Commander Premier come to mind.

This would be totally different than those approaches due to Avio - everything else can be dealt with easily but Avio is the real monkey in the wrench so to speak.

Right now I am just gathering contact info, maybe I put an idea together, maybe just put names together and let someone else do it - not sure.

With 260 in the field, Baron is correct that IF the owners' want it, someone will provide support.

Not sure about the WIP aircraft given today's developments - were any of them completed in the last month?

How great would it be if someone or a group of someone's could put it together so that some of the employee's, the vendors and the customers all get something useful?

The key IMO will be adult supervision, a realistic business plan, and, I think, deep pockets in terms of commitment and finances.

I've read this now:Michael McConnell said the furloughs are indefinite until a planned sale of the company to ETIRC Aviation -- Eclipse's largest shareholder -- in completed.Eclipse furloughs workersSeeing how employees are contractually required to be fired upon the sale to ETIRC, those employees shouldn't be considered on furlough and as such should be able to collect unemployment.

I agree that it is possible Baron, but my interpretation right now is you may need to own the TC, an STC might be very difficult/impossible - I will look into that later.

If there is a CH-7, my current expectation BTW, somebody will pick up the TC for sure.

The EAC customers have been nothing but good sports in terms of dealing with EAC (I am being generous), assuming a similar level of patience and support it is possible something good could be made of this.

The real key though would be finding experienced leadership who are a) interested, b) willing and c)capable of not just turning a sow's ear into a silk purse - but this particular sow's ear.

Hopefully to add to the preceding sage advice to Eclipse employees consider the following in regard to your employment journey.

1. Get an email or letter of recommendation from Eclipse HR, your supervisor and anyone else who you have supplied your faithful and skilled service. They should want to aid you in any way during this transition where you demonstrated your loyalty through the eleventh hour.

2. Contact your creditors and inform them of your employment situation. They are the same as you, don’t keep them hanging or offer a surprise down the road. I think you may find them willing to work with you and appreciative of the advanced notice. They are as human and honorable as the individuals who supply them with honest intent and information.

3. Although you manufactured aircraft for Eclipse, consider a broader definition of your skill sets. The initial response may be aviation centric (avionics, subsystems, airfoils) without consideration of customer requirements. You manufactured a skill based, labor intensive, high reliance and specialized low volume product. Consider medical equipment, specialty machinery (all disciplines) or any on-demand manufacture as within your sphere of expertise.

The real key though would be finding experienced leadership who are a) interested, b) willing and c)capable of not just turning a sow's ear into a silk purse - but this particular sow's ear.

And that it not be anyone from the Vern or Roel universe. It is a neverending string of drama and broken promises with them. If Roel actually had paid by now and was given the company to take over, I think we'd just see a repeat of that Eclipse was going to break even with this cash infusion and then repeatedly running around to ask for more money while not delivering on time or as promised.

“Take a few days (it is winter brake [break] this week in many states), spend some quality time with your loved ones, then hit the pavement for better opportunities. They will be found.”

With all due respect, I fully agree with spending time (quality or otherwise) with your loved ones. And “Thank you, baron”, for a lead-in to some comments. You, are what we call a “straight man” . . . setting up the “zinger” for the “clown” . . . and I recognize the fact that “I am the clown” . . . so “here goes”:

Anyone employed by Eclipse reading this blog should have hit the pavement (running) many months ago.

Twice I was “fired”, whether fair or unfair, made no difference. Both experiences were two weeks apart. “Fired” on a Friday . . . and working again the following Monday. By God’s grace, I never lost an hour’s wage . . . but those were better times, unlike this national financial farce going on today. (The second company fired the guy that fired me . . . and hired me back to manage another company six months later . . . but that’s another story.)

For the people at Eclipse, you should be pounding pavement even as we speak . . . you don’t have the privilege of “taking a much needed break”. Your next employer will soon enough learn how you spent your time between jobs. As an employer, I pay attention to these “minor” details. I don’t hire people that “sit back” and “let things happen” . . . I can’t afford that attitude.

Now, get off your “assets” and show how much you want to work. And don’t ask for a “position” . . . positions, just now, have more to do with the position of your “body” than where you sit at a desk.

gadfly

(And speaking of “quality time” . . . you are not in any position, just now . . . or any other time to judge the quality of your time . . . maybe in ten, twenty, or fifty years . . . your family will tell you “which time was quality”. Each of us is given the same time each day . . . spend it wisely. God is the time-keeper!)

(“Modestan” is a new blogger to me, but seems to have some good advice. The bottom line: Don’t wait . . . get “with it” right now. Time is not on your side.)

"I'd come in as a consultant with my fees in escrow. Resume in your in-box shortly ;)"

I think this will be the problem Baron - someone will need to pony up BEFORE the tough work even begins.

I doubt the DD phase to be the magnitude you suggest, but it will not be a cakewalk either.

I see some high rate consulting for the 2 or 3 guys who were doing the heavy-lifting on Avio to identify the known issues and the best way forward, plus the same/similar effort for any propulsion, systems and structural issues.

Then a prioritized plan to address those issues, rebuild vendor relationships, keep the customers informed, and then methodically execute the plan.

I bet $1.5M to figure out what you know and don't know, then another $.5-.75M to develop and price the fixes, rearrange the support network, and get to it - EXCLUSIVE of Avio fixes.

The Avio/no-Avio decision is the tough one - 2what do the customers want - a replacement cockpit that works like everybody else, or wait for a finished Avio NfG V2.0?

You are correct though, extremely complex for sure. Doable, but complex.

By the way, my experience is that the half life to do this deal is about 4 weeks. After that time with doors closed, all the employees and the "knowledge" of the company scatter too wide to rebuild instantly.

In Sept/01 I went to Israel to do due diligence and make an offer to acquire/merge a local company whose VCs had shut down employee funding just 3 weeks prior.

It was not fun at all having to track down the managers and key employees and meet with them at restaurants near their homes. Most had moved on, etc. It was impossible to properly value the company without more time, but spending more time would make the value ZERO.

In the end, all I could do was make a token offer of 1% of the stock in the acquiring company (itself a VC funded start up). Incredibly the VCs accepted at a mtg at Ben Gurion airport as I was about to depart.

I landed in the US Sept 6 (IIRC), 2001. Sep 11 2001 at 9:00 AM we had in mid-town NYC a board meeting to approve the merger.

I was under the impression with Avio NG 1.5 with the Garmin 400s this airplane should be good to go as far as avionics wise. This is excluding any "bugs" in the system.

Other than that there are the issues of other promised things such as a 6th seat or "minibar" etc.

I don't think there would have to be much work done on the avionics with the certification of the new 1.5 system. Therefore, I think the only real hurdle would be putting the system in the planes that do not have it, which would be all of them. i am sure because the system was certified then Eclipse had to have some sort of a plane to upgrade these planes, at least on paper somewhere... Correct me if I am mistaken.

I think AVIO needs to be dumped. we had a lot of computer development work done at my old company to build machine tool controls. we were successful for only two reasons. 1. there were no other sources for the controls we needed with the capabilities we needed available at any reasonable cost. We needed features and capabilities that were not available anywhere. 2. I found the right person to do the system architecture and oversee the hardware design and software.

If you can buy the capability you need, anywhere at a reasonable price and they are selling a lot more systems than you , buy it you will never be able to build a software based system with the same capability at anywhere near the same cost. We found the old rule of thumb about writing software was true. a good programmer can only write an average of 10 lines of quality debugged documented code a day.

therefor. there is no way AVIO is ever going to be as good as or as cost effective as the G1000 or its competitors. AVIO has to go and be replaced by Standard avionics and simple conventional control systems or the avionics will never be competitive with what other manufactures of small jets will offer.

I think RP has been laboring under the same illusion that Wedge did before him, it has to look like everything is OK or else people will panic.

Keep up appearances or confidence will fall away.

Now that we have that ridiculousness out of the way, maybe someone can step in who actually knows and does whatever the hell it is they should be doing to actually make this a going concern instead of looking like a going concern.

The time for smoke and mirrors and political favors is over. If there is to be a real 2nd Act, it has to come from people who know airplanes and the airplane business.

Mike/Flyger--No; that's not quite right. The position may have value when/if the EJ deal is consummated. If he does find a buyer, he'd undoubtedly have to disclose what the path to value is for the position.

Wet Fish--there are two aircraft with NG 1.5, Garmin 400's, and FIKI. And 2 others (that I know of) with Garmin 430's.

The local baseball team in Albuquerque was called the “Dukes” at one time . . . but of late are called the “Isotopes” . . . Who but a bunch of geeks from the “Sandia Labs Club” could have come up with such a name. But there it is! It speaks for itself! If only we knew their “half-life”!

Your comments using a “half life” of four weeks . . . in this case, the half life began about a year ago . . . and the half-life of “four weeks” has about the same value of “C14" determining the exact time of the “Big Bang”*. Now, I believe in the “Big Bang”, the “Bible”, and the “big event” of Eclipse closing its doors (finally, to the relief of many) on about this date (i.e.: “today”). “Big Bang” . . . 13.5 thousand-million years ago (adjusted term to comply with our UK brethren) . . . the “Bible”, tried and true . . . demise of Eclipse, the current “big event”, affecting the lives of many, local and otherwise.

What more can be said: A long time ago, someone said that not one complete E500 would ever be produced . . . the score still remains at “zero”. I stand by my claim.

Scams come and go . . . for anyone who cared to examine the comments of those who had long experience in aircraft manufacture and business, “Today” does not come with any surprise. But the heartaches of innocent workers and their families are no less real.

That’s enough of a load for now.

gadfly

(* “Big Bang” was a derogatory term coined by Sir Fred Hoyle, deceased, who said that the original creation event could not have happened only about fourteen to twenty billion years ago . . . because that would imply a “Creator” . . . evolution requires many times that much time to allow for “evolution”, and therefore cannot be true. But the term “stuck”, and continues to be a problem to both evolutionists, and the “young earth creationists’” group. C14 half-life is far too short to be of any value. Some of us don’t hold to either view.)

Eclipso,"t is our intention that all benefit coverage will remain in full effect."It sounds like Eclipse is continuing to fund insurance coverage, not the insurer itself.

(But this is probably a good litmus test, if anyone knows the answer).

But if not, at least it gives our friends two weeks- let's hope there is some good news by then.---------------------------------

ATM,Correct- my point is RP is making a good faith effort. Which I think is a significant change- for the better.---------------------------------CWMOR,Sincere Thanks from all of us for helping out with the resume distribution.

"I think RP has been laboring under the same illusion that Wedge did before him, it has to look like everything is OK or else people will panic."

I think the BoD had that problem in keeping Wedge. Wedge suffered from a different illusion- that everyone was stupider than him. (Sorry Wedge- that's a pretty small slice of the pie).

Are you aware of how 1.5 has held up for the aircraft with it installed? I ask because previous Avio versions were certified and still found to be buggy.

Given your druthers Ken, which would you prefer in your plane - a completed Avio even if it meant another $4-500K, or a conventional non-EFIS panel for maybe half that, or a G1000 with the delay and cost associated.

And if something good comes along, take it. Heck, if something mediocre comes along, take it anyway.

But, by golly, I like that little airplane, and think it can make it's way in the market place, at a reasonable production rate (in today's economy, maybe 50-75 per year*). I AM confident Eclipose will be "open for business", hopefully in a few weeks, maybe in a few months. (But, I would expect sooner, rather than later). IMHO. ----------------------------------*A lot depends on pricing. I still say, most of the buyers were just going to "flip" the plane. At $2.xM, the speculators go home, but still 50-75 buyers/keepers are there, I think, maybe even a little more.

ATM, I can foresee the Eclipse Completion Package ending up at between $600-800K per bird for the early birds, and maybe only $150K-200K for the later birds - allowing a support company to itself make an actual profit.

Couple that to a real-world inclusive support plan, also priced to provide a realistic and fair margin - and I think a reasonable, SMALL business case could be built.

Later, if there were an interest, the plane itself could go back into limited serial production (40-100/yr if there is sufficient demand at the $2.5-2.7M price).

But the ONLY focus for a new company should be getting the existing fleet to one configuration, or as close to that as possible, as soon as possible - otherwise, there can be no real economies of scale re: support, and support from the customer base will evaporate.

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- Eclipse Aviation officials sent about 800 workers home Wednesday on an unpaid furlough but expressed confidence they would be able to return when the company's pending sale goes through.

Eclipse president and general manager Michael McConnell, during a hastily arranged conference call with Albuquerque reporters, called it "a bit of a good news and some bad to terrible news."

McConnell said the good news was that Eclipse is "very close" to closing a $188 million sale to European-based EclipseJet Aviation International Inc., an affiliate of ETIRC Aviation.

He said the bad news was that furloughs were necessary while Eclipse waits for the sale to go through. Last month, a federal judge in Delaware approved the sale to allow Eclipse's reorganization under bankruptcy protection.

The aerial industry news site www.aero-news.net posted reports about the furlough early Wednesday before the press conference.

According to the report :

An anonymous source close to the matter tells ANN all employees at the company's plant were furloughed following an all-hands, last-minute meeting called Wednesday morning.

All workers are furloughed immediately; according to our source, employees will receive their last paychecks at the end of this week, and will receive benefits through the end of this month. It's unclear at this time whether employees may be called back to the company at a later date.

Details remain sketchy at this point. Calls to Eclipse Aviation personnel were either unanswered, or routed to voicemail.

Industry sites Aviation Week and http://www.avweb.com/ were not reporting the alleged furlough as of 1 p.m. Wednesday.

The Eclipse critic blog Eclipse Aviation Critic NG also was not reporting any developments.

CWMOR,"But the ONLY focus for a new company should be getting the existing fleet to one configuration, or as close to that as possible, as soon as possible - otherwise, there can be no real economies of scale re: support, and support from the customer base will evaporate."

I B.E.G. (ahem) to differ.The critical item is keeping the supplier base intact. THAT's the real economy of scale. With a highly integrated avionics suite, there HAS to be a flow of OEM parts- with only 260, low-hour, relatively reliable airplanes, there isn't going to be enough R&R business to make it worth while for the vendors. There HAS to be new airplanes rolling out the door, at least 50 per year, or the vendors walk. Then try to get a replacement widget.

Let’s see if I got this right: . . . Say, “$200K” per bird for a max of 260 birds . . . to maintain an unfinished flying contraption . . . according to my “Reverse Polish Notation” HP Calculator . . . $52M . . . shucks, that’s more money than Shane and I make in a year (including my Social Security checks). But even at that, I doubt it’s enough to titillate the imagination or “lust for wealth” of anyone I know. A job as “greeter” at the local Wal-Mart would provide better return on investment . . . and probably include health benefits, as well (at least, that what I’ve heard in rumor).

Ken, fly that thing ‘til it drops (no pun intended . . . although probably near the truth), then trade the thing in on something else . . . maybe not quite so exciting, but at least with a ready supply of parts, and mechanics willing to work on the beast. Think what you would gain . . . safety, easy repair (all aircraft require repair, from time to time), and a “potty” . . . no more quick “turn-a-rounds” for a potty stop after too much Colombian “tea”. Think what you would lose . . . all those “come backs” to the critics . . . and you would join those that quietly go through life, simply flying from A to B . . . whenever . . . without ever having to “prove” something to the “great unwashed”*.

gadfly

*(Being a member of the “great unwashed”, I am privileged to enjoy vicariously, the experiences of friends, that “on a whim”, jump into their jet . . . take the family out for pizza in a neighboring state, and come back for a good night’s sleep at their home in the mountains of northern New Mexico, or southern Colorado . . . that’s enough pleasure for me . . . to know that “some” can do that sort of thing. And that I had a part, somewhere in my life experience, to make that happen . . . safely. I am more than content! And you know . . . unless I press them for answers, I would never know that they even owned a jet . . . or two . . . or an oil company!)

"Not to spoil the enthusiasm, put Piper and Mooney are advertising for positions as well ... and we know that they have either laid off folks or shut their temporarily doors."

Bell and Sikorsky both have helicopter and support contracts with the government that are not affected by the economic downturn as well as their civilian helicopter orders. Why sit in ABQ and wait for Roel to do whatever it is that Roel does when he is not out yachting?

BEG, if I thought that a continuation of the production line, and Avio, were the smart bet I'd agree.

But I don't.

The new support company will almost certainly be of limited means relatively speaking - the resources necessary to produce jets (and the people to buy them) are in very short supply.

I propose a complete change in paradigm - support and consolidate the existing fleet, maybe offer FSW technology and tooling support, and only ofucs on boutique production after the existing customers are served and there is one baseline configuration.

It ain't sexy, it ain't cool, and it likely would not be Avio - what it is, is realistic, and achievable.

Might the BK court have something to say about today's turn of events? It would seem that technically firing all the staff would mean that the BK court would at least have to say something about what that means for Eclipse's future as well as Eclipse's standing. I would also think the BK court would want to question about the viability of Roel's buyout offer seeing how he had to let hundreds of people go due to lack of finances. It might sound nice that Roel says the sale is going through, but even without the allegations made against Roel, this course of events today might change how the BK court feels about the transaction.

how do you cost effectively maintain 230 planes or so, when they are all over the place, AND their owners are the cheapest "bastads" in the jet world?

These guys only bouth the plane, as Ken keeps reminding us, because they cost $50/hr less to operate...

Imagine trying to service this bunch.

Sorry, ain't no way IMO... no way.

Also, If I know you, you'll want to inspect the planes before you touch them (liability) and need to conform them. I can almost see the laughter - "YOU WANT WHAT TO REBUILD THE EMMPENAGE AND TAIL?" WHAT DO YOU MEAN REPLACE ALL THE ACTUATORS"

Anyhow, I am sure bringing the planes into conformity and up to FIKI will cost north of $400-$600k.

The, you'll want around $400 per hour to keep the ting in the air, plus engine MRO.

It simply does not make any sense.

There's no scasle... just a buch of pot committed guys who wanted a cheapo jet, and this DREAM is all but over. Once the plane becomes too expensive, as in real jet costs... they are out

Join Lockheed Martin, one of the foremost systems engineering, software, and systems integration companies in the world.

For an opportunity to be a part of technology history, attend our Arlington, TX Open House. On-the-spot interviews. Please bring multiple copies of your resume and information to fill out employment applications.

If this were a “conventional” aircraft in any sense of the word, there “might” be an aftermarket. But such is not the case . . . no matter how you stretch the “Eclipse truth” (pardon the oxymoron). No person in their right mind will support this fiasco . . . either before, or after the final burial services. Send flowers . . . cry at the grave-site . . . and move on. It’s all over but the shoutin’ . . . and there won’t be much of that, except in anger.

gadfly

Relief . . . finally! (But don't tell the local politicians . . . their problems may have only begun.)

My thoughts are AVIO is a total integration, so it would not be a simple case of finding a new vendor such as Garmin to install their system. To my knowledge no other aircraft uses Electonic Circuit Breakers, so the logistics of trying to take existing airframe and engines and incorporating those into new production planes using an alternative avionics suite I think would be almost insurmountable. With the size of the fleet already out there it makes sense that if Eclipse goes into chapter 7 it might be easier for a third party to develope a business plan to support the existing fleet that would be profitable.

EFIS 1.3 as I understand it supports FIKI where 1.5 supports FIKI and Garmin 400's. There is btw an existing SB that allows for the installation of dual diversity transponders along with dual Garmin 430's and an Audio panel with circuit breakers. To my knowledge only two were ever done. As far as unfinished items with AVIO my aircraft has installed and connected a stormscope and radar alt. but lacks the code to make it functional. Auto throttles also remain an unfinished item So to finish off Avio other then Garmin 400's,and deice which has the code written already, the stormscope, radar alt., and auto throttles still need to be coded into AVIO. I would love to see AVIO become open source but we all know that will never happen.

I wish everyone that was affected by todays news the best of luck.

P.S. I have seen ads in the controller ever since Eclipse filed for bankruptcy that still advertise warranty, jetcomplete, and free upgrades to AVIO 1.5. And most of those ads show they were recently updated. So either fraud or stupidity, I can't figure it out. I guess the old saying applys"buyer be ware"

ea500s"I have seen ads in the controller ever since Eclipse filed for bankruptcy that still advertise warranty, jetcomplete, and free upgrades to AVIO 1.5...either fraud or stupidity, I can't figure it out. I guess the old saying applies: 'buyer be ware'"

I've received a lot of e-mails today, most from Eclipse employees, a few from folks offering to help them, and even a couple from vendors interested in some post-BK support concept.

It is heart rending hearing from the employees - I was honestly not prepared for that.

I want to make certain the employees understand, we have never wished you ill - our problem has been with the head shed, mahogany row, the executive leadership (or lack thereof) with a few notable exceptions (Don Taylor, Oliver Masefield, Perry Denker, Jack Harrington, Mike Brown).

The leadership team at Eclipse, enabled by the Board of Directors and by a now-victimized customer base that kept accepting promise after broken promise, are responsible for this mess.

The offer to help is genuine, and we do really wish you all well.

If you do contact me please indicate what your primary and secondary skills are (e.g., UniGraphics, Quality Inspector, Avionics Tech), or attach a resume, makes putting you in touch with recruiters or other programs easier.

I want to make certain the employees understand, we have never wished you ill - our problem has been with the head shed, mahogany row, the executive leadership (or lack thereof) with a few notable exceptions (Don Taylor, Oliver Masefield, Perry Denker, Jack Harrington, Mike Brown).

The leadership team at Eclipse, enabled by the Board of Directors and by a now-victimized customer base that kept accepting promise after broken promise, are responsible for this mess.

I wouldn't give Masefield a pass. Actually I hold him high on the list for being responsible for the scam. This was the guy whom Vern used to tout the 600 hours to build each unit that was a huge part of the Eclipse business model...well, it was the business model. If Vern didn't have this guy with his technical qualifications saying how Eclipse could build all these hundreds of aircraft per year, Vern wouldn't have gotten as far.

IMO, the critical thing everyone needs to focus on is McConnell's comment "...we made no promises." I only found that on aero-news.net

That comment, of course, is VERY ominious. The cynic trapped inside my brain says that could be their plausible deniability if/when they have to answer why they couldn't call back ALL 800-850 people affected today. I suspect this could be yet another cost cutting move by Roel/ETIRC to get EjAI as lean as possible on day one. Hmmmm, come to think of it, I remember that Dutch article that said of the 2/3's **remaining** at EAC, another 1/3 of EAC staff would be cut for even more savings. That's the article I had forwarded to the Abq Journal and then they later had to do a retraction because EAC claimed the translation was wrong. Ha! We just need to wait longer before what we learn elsewhere becomes reality. It may come true once we see who gets called back...

And has anyone else noticed the shrinkage in body count? Last number I heard was 950 employees at EAC, including Albany, NY and Gainesville, FL service centers.

Ken- any chance you know if all 3 service centers are kaput for the time being? Good luck to you and all the other owners that were willing to role the dice on this. It may be a stain on my resume, but I'd rather explain EAC to potential employers than the nightmare in TN working for my father-in-law.

eclipso sorry I wasn't aware you are a military fighter pilot, thanks for sharing.

I figured discussion here on the Eclipse is centered around general aviation aircraft, and to be honest with you I never even thought about military or oommercial aviation aircraft when I said that. Wonder if Boeing is using it in the 78 ?

Also if you are going to quote me, please quote what I said, not some portion that can give a different context.

That comment, of course, is VERY ominious. The cynic trapped inside my brain says that could be their plausible deniability if/when they have to answer why they couldn't call back ALL 800-850 people affected today. I suspect this could be yet another cost cutting move by Roel/ETIRC to get EjAI as lean as possible on day one.

The thing is that when/if the sale goes through whatever employees are there get automatically fired no matter how many or how few employees Eclipse has at the time. I don't see RoelJet gets a benefit by doing this, but rather Roel has put himself at huge risk. I see this as only threatening the deal rather than putting him at an advantage.

The Avio vs a more conventional G1000-based system is not an either/or type question.

In the short term, for AT LEAST the next 2 years, Avio will be the ONLY choice on the 260 EA500s in the field. It will need to be supported, as it will take a minimum of 2 years to certify anything else.

In parallel you can entertain bids for alternatives to Avio - a longer topic.

Supporting Avio happens at different levels.

1 - Upgrading aircraft to Avio NG 1.5 + G400s as presently certified by FAA/EASA. Assuming there is a Service Bulletin or STC or the like already developed and approved, and vendors still produce component, then this is a simple task and no R&D needs to be spent. It is just schedule, upgrade, bill. Any decent avionics shop can be lined up to do this.

2 - Supporting the above as installed/as certified. Again, no R&D needed, so long as a plan for vendors to produce parts is secured. It is break, replace, reload, bill.

3 - SW/HW Fixes when problems are found (and they will be found). That will require R&D to identify, develop a fix, re-certify, reload, return to service, bill. Not terribly complex, but quite a step up in complexity.

4 - Continued development, certification of missing items (AT, SVS, full FMS, etc). This is a different game with tens of millions in R&D and certification required per item, with some, A/T and full FMS, likely not achievable at economically viable terms unless production continues into the many hundreds of planes.

Jet fuel deliveries slipped nearly 9 percent in January, even though Jet Fuel prices are the lowest they've been in years.

GAMA Q4 and Full Year figures released yesterday - not good. Shipments took a dive for the year and last quarter, outlook not good. Big move upmarket, pistons down over 20% for the year, while overall shipments down 7% (by volume). Revenue still way up as the move from piston to jets continues.

has anyone else noticed the shrinkage in body count? Last number I heard was 950 employees at EAC, including Albany, NY and Gainesville, FL service centers.

I noticed that as well. Though I figured there might be some funny math going on, it's as likely a reflection of people fleeing on their own terms. Shane's alluded to the latter being ( at least partly ) the case, several times since the BK filing - and he's the guy with the inbox.

-------------------------------------

It would be appropriate to express condolences to everybody affected by today's news. And though I do, I feel even more strongly the highest aspirations for all of you. This situation is the thing opportunities are made of - even in the tough financial & job environment that we live in.

------------------------------------

"Stranger Things Have Happened"

Pigs fly. Hell freezes over. I agree with every freaking word that Baron95 has posted since the announcement. More pointedly, I endorse the spirit in which he wrote them. He has the right idea:

Though the situation sucks, he doesn't even think about how it sucks - he contemplates, "What's the best thing to do immediately in this situation?"

Though Eclipse squandered an almost infinite number of opportunities, he knows that opportunity still exists, "What are the opportunities in front of us?"

One of the 'technical' concerns with ECBs was how to keep pilots from easily, I mean accidentally, 'uncollaring' things (such as windshield heaters?) during flight. One suggestion was to use password protection that only the mechanic would know...not exactly foolproof.

Anybody know if the E500 has such protection on their system?

----------

PS - I am sorry to say I'm close to the Gadfly on this one, there's not much sympathy left in me for any employees still at ABQ. I know several who were offered plum jobs in the last 6 months who turned them down on the 'hope' that everything would turn around at EAC.

"PS - I am sorry to say I'm close to the Gadfly on this one, there's not much sympathy left in me for any employees still at ABQ. I know several who were offered plum jobs in the last 6 months who turned them down on the 'hope' that everything would turn around at EAC."

I agree! Geez we've seen the writing on the wall for months and months. What's up with these guys who refuse to face reality. I wonder how many are going to sit around and wait for the big bail out? People it's over, get the hell out of Dodge.

things not coming as a surprise should not surprise anybody ...!(or it is at best politeness or plain BS!)

i always hated the "I told you so" reaction , but long ago i reported a comment someone knowing RP much before anyone approaching anything in this fiasco had the kindness to tell me ....

"meet RP once , and think you won't have enough days left in your life to feel sorrows about it !"i suppose he was right ...

here now , what do we have ?

an orphaned thing which at present time does not even exist as something finished in any ways ...

a bunch of guys who happen to own one or to be glued to have one ...

read Mr Gadfly wisdom : if you are not among those = run , run fast and away ...!

if you happen to be a victim-owner , you may join a "brotherhood of maintenance" which is going to be expensive ...or rely on some private firm(s) which are going to treat you like an hostage ...

alternative path is not spend more than fuel and few bucks on minor things ... when hard-work will be needed in exchange of big-sum , get infos on metal-scrape-price ...you may eventually make some money , for the first time !

for the most unlucky ones (60%'s) : consider that you HAD a good show , where humor ,stunts bad faith , etc ... was very well played ...kinda entertaining , no ?

off-course , it's on you ...so drop the matter , breath deeply , put a big smile on and move on ...

BECAUSE remember this :

should consider that the story has been this long BECAUSE you were still around ...

The FADEC are separate cards in the AVIO chassis, and are essentially stand alone units. Repackaged into their own LRUs they could be easily interfaced with another avionics suite. However since they're certified under the engines, the engine cert would have to be opened up to accomplish this. I don't see P&W spending one more Loonie on the 610.

FYI collared CB's can not be reset or uncollared while the airplane is in flight. I believe (but could be wrong) that the option to uncollar a breaker must be done in the first 2 minutes after power is applied to AVIO. After that the line select key to uncollar goes away. (pulled breakers can be reset anytime)

I did speak to one service center yesterday, and it was confirmed that all the service centers are closed and was told that parts are not avialable for shipping out of ABQ. It was also reported that service centers were mostly empty at the time of the furlough.

first, It was designed wrong using the wrong architecture. It has all the evidence that it was designed by programmers not experienced in programming real time software/hardware systems. Building real time systems is a far different game than designing software for systems for information handling systems like PC's in PC software for instance if there is too much information the whole system just slows down so it will not make mistakes. in real time systems that are interacting with the realworld like Machine tool controls and aircraft control systems any time an event occurs it must be dealt with. it cannot be put in a cue for action when you get around to it. This can cause great problems in normal information software. The primary symptom of this problem happening in AVIO is the random changes in altitudes, alerts showing up when they are not supposed to, etc. this is the clue that the computer is being interrupted in the middle of another task and it then does strange things. Thus the total design philosophy of AVIO is flawed and probably will need to be totally re written. it is not a robust real time control system and will always be dangerous to fly with.

second, based on the fact it still has bugs and is incomplete, even if designed correctly, I would estimate that only 50% of the time/cost needed to perfect it has been spent. It usually takes 50% of the total cost to finish the last 10% of the functionality of a software program.

there is a huge amount of knowledge on this blog about aircraft and business, but it sounds like no one has been involved with designing and building computer control systems for real time control and the huge expense and complexity of doing that task.

In this instance perhaps AVIO could be salvaged just as the system that controlled the very defined and limited mechanical tasks such as FADAC, flaps, heating etc. this much information might might be within its capability to be reliable however critical tasks like navigation, the autopilot, communication etc should be moved off to other proven systems like the G1000 and dedicated autopilots and Garmin 530's etc.

Vern came from the PC world where, if their was too much information, the computer just slowed down and thus he probably hired programmer's that were expert in that area not real time controls. He did not know enough to realize the real software problem he was dealing with. He had never had a robot go crazy in the middle of a program for no apparent reason and after weeks of work the problem was traced to an external input from a over temp limit sensor on the chiller that directly interrupted the program and locked it up.

AVIO has to go in its present form. I would not fly the eclipse as transportation as Hal may do something crazy one of these days and try to kill me.

We need to thank all the present owners and pilots of Eclipse airplanes for their service in offering to be test pilots to see if they can outwit Hal

To all those who contacted me about placement I have your info and am forwarding it to the recruiters and projects I am aware of.

To all those who offered help standby, I will be forwarding contact info for some of these folks to you as well.

I am specifically interested in hearing from folks intimately aware of Avio's CURRENT status - development, planned fixes, known bugs, etc. I do not want the actual info (NDA's and all that, at least until EAC is liquidated), just want to find out who knows what. Thinking electrical/avionics engineers, techs, company pilots, and buyers.

CWMR wrote:With 260 in the field, Baron is correct that IF the owners' want it, someone will provide support.

With 260 in the field, Baron is correct that IF the owners' want it, someone will try to provide support.

As correctly identified, with that Monkey on your back (Avio), there is a very high likelyhood that support can not be assured.

The AVIO A/C may be better off than Avio NfG? I don't know how autonomous Avidyne is with AVIO, but if they have the source code, they may be able to address shortcomings which get AD'd.

If Wedge took AVIOnFg in house, and the software cert team got scattered on the four winds, I find it very unlikely that a sustainable model exists to provide a software team competant to certify changes in this level of software.

thank you for thinking about saving the Eclipse. If you get real serious and get your hands on the actual code and hardware design for AVIO I know of people that are very expert in real time control systems that might be able to help you. beware though, I have found that fixing major problems in an existing software based system is usually as expensive as starting from scratch. Thus many times the best thing to do is start over now that your prototype effort (AVIO) has really defined what the problem is.

Until you see the code and get it analyzed you really will not know how bad it is. I would base an estimate of the cost required initially to bring the EA500 existing AVIO up to full control capability on what it would cost to retrofit other good proven control systems into the EA500 not on what some estimate would be to fix AVIO.

FreedomJamTarts you are right on the money about the probability of anyone providing support for Avio (or Avio NG) given the latest announcements.

However, the situation is worse than you suggest.

Let's assume that Avidyne and all the other Avio suppliers have all their source code and a desire to support the aircraft, the big hole in this line of thought is Eclipse.

Remember that Eclipse wrote much of the software in Avio and Avio NG. It is Eclipse software running in the ACS and other parts of the Avio system that ties all the other 8 or 12 or 15 (depending on how you count) avionics vendors' products together.

Without access to that code, an Avio vendor will still need someone at Eclipse to coordinate with the other vendors, write system requirements, write integration code and manage the certification process.

Bottom line -- without access to that code and people who are intimately familiar with that code, there will be no new Avio 1.x releases.

BeeDriver--you're a version too late in your analysis. The issues with occasional random changes in altitude, frequency or transponder codes were corrected in NG 1.3. Those problems have totally disappeared in my Eclipse with the new software.

There should be 1.5 and/or 1.6 upgrade "instructions" available as part of the FIKI and EASA certification process.

Upgrading AvioNG aircraft to 1.5 or 1.6 should be an achievable process for a competant shop.

Upgrading baseline Avio aircraft will be more difficult ... but ... whether iterative or big-leap ... getting them to AvioNG 1.6 should be achievable as long as the PFD/MFD hardware is available (as harnesses, etc. can be manufactured by other than the OEM).

Like many have discussed before, converting to something other than Avio or AvioNG is a huge task, as functionality is distributed to a number or LRUs besides the PFD/MFD.

If the effort focuses on getting AvioNG 1.6 aircraft, there is a path ahead.

There should be 1.5 and/or 1.6 upgrade "instructions" available as part of the FIKI and EASA certification process.

Yes, and somewhere in the process it says something like "install software binary image file version 2.3.06" or whatever number it is.

Upgrading AvioNG aircraft to 1.5 or 1.6 should be an achievable process for a competant shop.

They can't make up binary files out of thin air.

Like many have discussed before, converting to something other than Avio or AvioNG is a huge task, as functionality is distributed to a number or LRUs besides the PFD/MFD.

Converting to something else is a *smaller* task than reverse engineering Avio so you upgrade and maintain it. I am sure that yesterday, some very vital knowledge between the ears of a few software developers walked out of the factory and will never return.

If the effort focuses on getting AvioNG 1.6 aircraft, there is a path ahead.

Your inexperience in managing a certified software project is very evident in this post.

It does happen where projects like this fail only inches from the goal line - my suspicion is it not 6 inches, but maybe not 6 yards.

This makes a HUGE difference in the effort re: Avio.

The logisitical issues related to hardware, glass, etc., are all significant in their own right, but the status of the code is the prime mover in any discussion about getting to a unified configuration.

Without a unified or at least very similar configuration (all NfG for example) the support business case would require both startup and ongoing expenditures that make it untenable IMO.

Now is the time to be asking questions and making contacts, not insulting each other about comprehension of airborne HW/SW development, IMO.

I think your post about realtime control systems software is right on. I have had experience implementing such systems, albeit in telecommunications systems, not avionics. You're right that it takes a completely different mindset and a completely different software architecture. Also, I discovered that most software engineers haven't got a clue about the basics of real-time software, let alone the construction of complex, multi-faceted control applications.

Having said that, I don't think it's possible from where we sit to know much about how Avio is put together. It does seem to exhibit some symptoms of poor design that you point out, but it also seems to go on working more or less, as Ken claims. Your estimate of 50% done is probably good. I also agree with your assertion that it should have been two systems instead of one, which had it been done, would today allow replacement of the navigation/FMS system.

This leaves a terrible dilemma: There is no way that anyone could afford to do the development work to put the G1000 (or even G600) into an Eclipse fleet of 250 aircraft (probably many fewer than that still operating). That's just way too expensive for no return. So that leaves the fleet stuck with Avio, I think for eternity. No one can afford to do the remaining 50% of the undone work on Avio either. So Avio is an albatross on the fleet: can't replace it, can't improve it, and probably shouldn't trust it.

Ken and those of similar thinking will probably go on flying these aircraft until something forces it to go AOG. Avio will probably go on working pretty much the way it has for Ken, especially for those lucky enough to have or get 1.3 installed. I doubt that Avio itself will be the cause of some ultimate AOG condition. But it's stranglehold on the aircraft will prevent anyone from making substantial investment in or improvements to the EA500.

It needs to be known if Avio NfG 1.5 is the final version, or if there were more upgrades planned.

1.5 isn't the final version. Actually with Eclipse I don't think there ever was a final version planned, just it had been at what point Eclipse could claim to have made the product to spec. With s/n 260 Eclipse claimed on the hardware side that it was up to spec and it was with 2.0 that Eclipse claimed would be to spec on the software side. 2.0 was supposed to have already come out ages ago.

Baron please lend the Mackrel some of your Meds. He's lost his marbles (actually it looks like somewone spiked his drink with KoolAid).

CWMR wrote:Couple that to a real-world inclusive support plan, also priced to provide a realistic and fair margin - and I think a reasonable, SMALL business case could be built.

Worthless theory. We all want a fusion power Delorean which runs on trash, and costs $3K. Barons $10M to do DD is a great post. Since the entire software team at Ecorpse needed about a year to certify AvioNfG 1.5 (how many many years), but is curretnly disintergrating as a team, do you really think you can get a grip on the magnitude of the future liablity with 2-3 guys in a couple of weeks? That is Hubris, which this program has already had in sufficient quantities.

Later, if there were an interest, the plane itself could go back into limited serial production (40-100/yr if there is sufficient demand at the $2.5-2.7M price).

There is no interest. How many sales did Ecorpse close in the year the plane was in production and the sticker price was ~$1.6M. At $2.7M what idiot buys an EA500 rather than a Mustang?

I propose a complete change in paradigm - support and consolidate the existing fleet, maybe offer FSW technology and tooling support, and only ofucs on boutique production after the existing customers are served and there is one baseline configuration.

Consolidate the fleet? Lovely headline for a VC Powerpoint presentation. Put a dollar number on that proposal. Add the cost of certify the changes. Add your fudge factor for the unknown unknowns (How identical are these 260 "conforming A/C" - I have heard that the Antonov 124's vary in length up to meter?)

Boutique production? Another bullshit bingo sound bite. How are you going to do "boutique production" on a SMD multi layer board where COTS components are constantly being phased out of production, and you need to constantly qualify replacements. Any change needs to be requealified agains DO160! Of course it can be done. Put a price on this!

**********************Eclipse Issues Furloughs For 800 Employees

So there were 800 employees, but only 80 cars in the car park? Did Roel buy Dayjets Antfarm software to generate this new paradigm of car pooling?

***********************EA500sForget your A/T dreams. There will never again be an organisation with the resources to certify feature addition requiring a big flight test program.

***********************Owners:

Here is my proposal for an EA500 business model capable of turning a profit on you investment.

Location Arizona desert, best on edge of town on a road to a main tourist attraction. Slightly raised section of the road, where you can be seen for a couple of minutes by drivers.

Golf driving range on side of road, EA500 located about 120 yards away, and 30' lower, $1 per ball. Prize for hitting the plane.

Staffed with University students.

It'll take you about two years to recoop your investment.

The one at Lake Taupo doesn't have plane to aim at, it is a gold mine.

But it's stranglehold on the aircraft will prevent anyone from making substantial investment in or improvements to the EA500.

Hopefully now this lesson will show more people how integrated proprietary systems are bad rather than a benefit - at least for aircraft. If not for Avio the existing fleet would have a higher resale value and be easier to maintain. These systems really put you at the mercy of the aircraft manufacturer.

The documentation exists, the code base exists, the certification artifacts exist ... reverse engineering is not an issue at this point.

Nobody questions if they exist. The question is can you get the legal access to all the files and artifacts, *plus* the talent that wrote it in the first place, and setup a viable support team to work on it? Note that much of the software is a mash up from various companies, as you point out, which makes the job harder to organize.

Once the intellectual property rights are sorted out, any s/w that has not owned by the applicable vendor is an asset of the estate that may be purchased at the fire sale.

Oh great, we'll look for the pieces in various ABQ yard sales. Maybe we'll find all of them someday.

There's a lot more to this than collecting the files. Supporting this kind of software is hard enough when the original developers are *helping*. But if anybody is going to try this, it would be someone who doesn't fully understand the challenge. Best of luck to you!

I think whatever version Avio each airplane has right now is the last version they are going to have for a long time, possibly ever.

If one has all the source to AvioNG, then I think it is easier to G1000 the airplane than to continue to support Avio. In the long run, Garmin is going to keep G1000 updated with new stuff (synth vision, ADS-B, datalinks, etc) and that's just too much effort for Avio. Also, how would your answer change if you knew IS&S was soon to declare bankruptcy?

I am just thinking out loud and trying to gage if there is an opportunity worth pursuing.

Based on the replies in the inbox, it seems there might be.

I did not say 2-3 guys and weeks, I just said 2-3 guys - the guys who were doing the heavy lifting, who know where the skeletons are burried and what the product plan was.

I stated before, I bet $1.5-2M to figure out what is known and unknown and formulate a plan - no parts, no facilities, just due diligence and plan formulation.

Among my specialies, such as they are, is doing a lot with a little (in terms of engineering team size)which I think will be necessary on any effort to support the preemie jet, if a true case can be made for a profitable concept.

Don't care if anyone or everyone agrees, I am just exploring options - there are afterall about 260 of these things in the wild and those in customer hands are owned by folks who have shown a lot of patience and more than a little financial wherewithal.

If you have somtheing positive to add I am glad to have it, but I am interested in possibilities solutions and suggestions at this point. I think this collapse is just what the product needed - and I have basically always said that.

Re up grading AVIO I would not build a business based on that assumption. Having a proprietary software based system tied to the aircraft is OK and probably a good business strategy if you are Boeing. You have the resources to keep up and can spread the cost over enough units for it to be worth it. however if you are one of the small guys in the market your cost to keep up with the Jones's is so expensive that you will not ever be able to compete with other players on price. the large volume players in a market can afford and probably make money with proprietary systems but the small guys need to piggyback on suppliers who's only business is to supply the leading edge components in a market. thus if Eclipse was going to sell 2000 airplanes per year having their own system was a good strategy. if they are going to sell 50 or 100 units and be competing with other small guys, they must use systems like the G1000 in order to have the latest and the best avionics on the market. if any player do not have the latest and the best it is an absolute disaster trying to sell anything. If you do not show that your capabilities in all areas are at least competitive with everyone else you have virtually no chance of selling the advantages you do have.

Roel had contracted to supply the Production Line Group their aircraft complete with FIKI, AvioNG 1.6 (including the G400W's) and EASA certification for $1.375 million, on closing. My understanding is that the '1.6' was required to meet the EASA spec.

U.S. aircraft have everything required (except EASA) in AvioNG 1.5.

In my opinion that's the 'last' version of AvioNG anyone is ever likely to see.

And it's also the biggest liability overhanging the aircraft. Too much integration can be a bad thing, in a GA context.

"Sad product where collapse is it's best outcome! Attempting to pick up the pieces of such a collapse most likely will have the same property: re-collapse will be the best outcome.'

Can't say I fundamentally disagree with you TBM. My point has always been the product needed to be separated from irrational management to have any chance.

That is, I think, about to happen.

I agree that unless Avio is to be completed and supported, it would make more sense to make a switch to G1000, etc.

I think there are other alternatives that provide much of the same capability, such as the Aspen unit, coupled with modern digital nav/com, etc.

The real key though is a stable baseline - for the physical plane (wheels, brakes, transparencies, extended range tip tanks, FIKI equipment, etc.), and then the same for the avionics.

The make/buy decision re: Avio/Garmin, fill-in-the-blank is the complex issue. Replacement actuators can be qualified, better wheel and brakes can be identified, that is easy by comparison.

Would be nice to hear from some owners - I am hearing from lots of former Eclipsers at literally EVERY level from within the adventure, vendors, and the critics - what would the owners really want/accept, and at what price?

Has the actual business plan of RP (as opposed to the public, court approved plan) been discussed or "stress-tested"?

It appears to me that the chief salable assets are the 28 (?) half completed frames in the factory, and the Dayjet craft (?).

That seems to be about 75 M worth of inventory, if RP could convince the yet missing supplier (P&W) to send the parts to complete. In order to receive another jet engine shipment on credit, RP needs to make world+P&W believe he has a go-forward strategy.

The fall 2008 factory activity of building craft without the jets available seems consistent with a BK plan of front loading the costs of inventory to the creditors, and capitalizing the new co using the stored inventory.

I suspect RP is solely trying to sell the in-the-factory half-completed frames and perhaps some 50 other pipeline craft. ISSC has written down inventory it owns of AvioNG, RP will likely make a offer to obtain that below cost.

He will earn back his parties investment if he can wring 100M from the inventory.

This plan only uses the Spanish/Russian money as a masquerade of a future plan in order to obtain the parts necessary to sell the half completed jets cluttering up the factory floor in ALBQ.

To anyone brave enough to take on FPJ support, I have one piece of advice:-

Charge like a wounded elephant.

These 'marks' are committed (some would say they should have been committed , but that's water under the bridge) to their aircraft. The only way they can fly them is with parts from a certified source. EAC were clever enough to lock down contracts for a huge range of the 'bits' they used.

Get control of those supply contracts and you can make enough money to pay for the ongoing support.

Be ruthless with the owners. They can't fly these turkeys without you...

(That's the best laugh I've had in a few days, 'Zed' not knowing complex software....)

It is one thing to "know software", and yet an entirely different thing to support software, mashed up from multiple places, in the aftermath of a company liquidation. To simply get back to the day when you can compile the code again will be a major achievement, not because you need talent, but you need all the pieces and the tribal knowledge that put it together. Part of this is that I expect Avio, once you see the insides, will be this tangled mess that isn't even truly supportable by Eclipse, much less a third party.

There has never been a third party take over of a certified software system like Avio. Avio doesn't impress me as likely to be the first.

It is easy to sit back and proclaim somebody can do it. It is quite another to actually go do it.

Roel has SOLD the 27 (plus one)* aircraft on the line as of 25th November 2008 for $1.375 million each. That's only just over $37 million.

What's remarkable is that there were ONLY 28 in the entire factory. So much for 'high volume' production....

Roel's plan is not known to us. In fact, I'm pretty sure what he got the 'senior note holders' to sign up for in October or early November 2008 is now pretty much waste paper. He was shaping to (probably) charge about $2.5 million for a new FPJ, offering a coupon to the deposit holders which would see him get out at about break even and then make a right few quid on the upgrades.

My thinking is that the price increase/low value coupon would have driven away many of these 'orders' instantly. He could have charged as much as he wanted for the upgrades required to the 'pre s/n 105 birds. Where else could the owners get the required bits? The (mostly) software updates for those 'post' 105 birds would have been 'jam on top'.

Trickle out say, 4 a month, for a mere 6 months, always promising to do more real soon. Then shut production down in ABQ and move lock stock and (two smoking) barrel(s) to Russia.

Don't take offense at the Meds call. You post have been some of the best ever on this blog, but I have been amazed that you feel there is a viable business in there.

I wasn't kidding on the driving range thing. I truly believe that such out of the box, marketing gag, type stuff is far more realistic than "supporting the fleet".

You can get a better return on investment from bottled beer.

Reading those testimonies to the senate subcommittee told me that this company never had a handle on conformity.

Retrofitting anything to these planes is likely going to be a exercise in hand fitting.

Due diligence based on 2-3 key people from the Ecorpse software development team? The same team that took over a year to produce V1.5? I do not doubt there are some brilliant people in there, but I doubt anyone in that team has ever had a chance to develop their brilliance in a well managed project.

How do you choose the 2-3 people from the software team to advise you? How do you check if they were trying to fix the problems, or part of the problem?

Do you know what flight test costs? How differcult it is to get to an working understanding/agreement of the requirements between your flight test team and the authority team?

Gadfly and ATM have a long reliably history. The fat lady is wailing into her encore.

I don't doubt the attempted resuscitation will occur.

It will fail.

In ten years, the only EA500's still flying will be experimental category, and operated roughly like the warbirds, cannibalizing the rest of the fleet.

Do I have any names? I live about 8000 miles from NM, and have only ever seen an EA500 once, so know, I have no idea who is who in Ecorpse.

That stench has been so strong and unmistakably for so long, that even someone 8000 miles away, with no inside knowledge or contact could clearly read the writing on the wall.

Sorry CWMR, I think talk of sustainable support models, consolidating the fleet and boutique production helps no one. It just creates more smoke for people who really want to believe to see mirages in. I know you are trying to help, and I think it is great that you are helping the ex-staff with referrals, and job connection. This is the best thing you can do.

2) It is irrational to believe that –any- further software or avionics hardware development or maintenance is possible by anyone other than the original vendor or development and certification teams. To be very clear … no one other than the original house using their tools will be able to compile a certified load.

3) It is irrational to believe that any software or hardware reverse engineering is possible without huge amounts of time and money (even if it was legal).

4) The last certified version of the various Avio and AvioNG software loads exist, and are owned by the estate.

5) Absent a new purchase from the original vendor, the unique avionics spares on hand are the only spares that will ever be available.

6) A qualified software team could prove, using the available documentation and artifacts, that the software files are identical to the certified code.

7) A qualified avionics shop could upgrade early E500’s to a later configuration using only the hardware and software components available from the estate (absent harnesses, and other common components).

8) A successful “ongoing support” organization could hire a small but sufficient number of former EAC staff to support the existing aircraft until critical parts run out.

9) G1000 conversion is possible … given sufficient time and money … which makes it (choose one) unlikely : impossible.

10) Avidyne is probably best positioned to support both Avio and AvioNG aircraft … that is if they are still operating when this whole thing pans out.

11) A consortium lead by the E5C or another advocacy organization could organize the purchase and preservation of available intellectual property, software, components, etc.

12) To preserve spares for the various aircraft configurations, this group may decide not to allow upgrades … because every box used for an upgrade is one less spare for that group of owners.

Adam

WinXP Embedded may be used in certified avionics, but not in the Level A, B, and C systems in the E500.

Shane

The IS&S kernel is elegant simplicity. There isn’t a lot of “there” there, but it works very well.

Most folks use a qualified package from LynuxWorks, Green Hills, Seaweed, etc.

There is NO POSSIBILITY of putting G1000 in EA500. There is no meaningful "make/buy" analysis you can do. Any such surgery to Avio is beyond the collective means of the owners (well, if not beyond the collective means, certainly beyond the collective willingness to pay!).

You can't just pick up where EAC left off and make a go of it -- not without uncountable millions of dollars to invest.

I always looked to you to be the voice of reality on the blog, and now you've left the land of the rational because you're getting a bunch of email?

All I am doing is asking questions to see if a viable business case can be built. I AM getting some great e-mails, but I'm not running out to put anything together based on hundred emails over a 24 hour period.

There are a lot of questions to be asked and answered, most probably not here in the open, but there has been some great discussion so far here on the blog and in the inbox.

I am living in the same universe I have always been in - one of opportunity and vision. That said, I am still a critic.

I have always been critical of how the plane was developed, marketed and supported.

But I am also an undeniably entrepreneurial kind of guy, I love my industry, and I would like to see something good come from this $3B smoking hole. If I can turn an honest buck at the same, more power to me.

Reports are that the plane, physically, is a nice little machine with some known deficiencies (brakes, tires, transparencies, etc.).

There are clearly at least 100 or so customers, perhaps more, who are 'pot-committed' and who want to see the plane supported.

As discussed before, there are aftermarket support companies for the Aerostar, the Twin Commanders, and the Commander singles.

However, there are about 1000 of each those in the wild - compared to only about 260 preemie jets.

AND none of those companies have to deal with the issues that Avio creates - and those MAY be significant issues.

We simply do not know how close to 'done' Avio actually was, nor what development plans existed. We don't know about spares availability via IS&S who are themselves in trouble. We don't know if the customer base would accept a retrofit to a more conventional approach.

Lots and lots of questions - no harm from asking them.

The biggest obstacle to Eclipse has always been the irrational leadership, and trading Vern for RiP only exascerbated that as evidenced by the results since.

Only by changing the core objective - support vs production, can anything good possibly be accomplished. The 60%'ers have been screwed, blued, and tattooed - and the possibility of resuming production seems limited at best in the current economic situation.

What the venture always lacked, and the primary focus of the blog over several years and two able caretakers, was adult and rational leadership. This was because the business plan did not call for it.

Any new business plan has to be a truly NEW business plan - make a supportable product that can be operated cost effectively. Production is a non-starter for many reasons, but lack of sales being a major contributor.

The only way to re-establish the severely damaged brand, is through results - words are irrelevant.

The best way to accomplish results is to support the existing planes, not make more promises and waste resources.

Updating the fleet, and supporting it in the fashion most jet owners would expect is the only way, IMO, to potentially lay the framework for resumption of production, but at no greater than boutique rates. Think American Cjhampion, with jets.

I appreciate your concern for my health but I assure you, I am the same fish I've always been.

I meant no disrespect - I sincerely doubt "cost effective" support is possible for this fleet, but I have no idea.

You are at least looking under the floorboards, so to speak.

Have at it man... I have an idea for you, but you better jump on it now. Ready?

Here is how to go about it, buddy:

1- keep posting things on this blog (for another day or so) like "I have the core AVIO developers onboard"... "I am in discussions with some of the suppliers" you have already started this - jolly good - continue and spark some interest... exaggerate as much as possible... DO NOT WORRY

2- Next Tuesday, announce a plan, actually announce 4 plans:

a- avionics conformity upgrade package - (pick a price - it does nt matter, just any price that's appealing to the Owners, and no too high.. say $237,000. This is the guaranteed price, IF you send in 50% right now.

b- same as above, but if you send in 25% right now, there's CPI and you are not given priority in line to have the work done. You'll probably be in 2011 or later.

c- JetReplete (yes -REPLTE look it up, its TLC imbued with the spirit of the Reformation - get it?) this is an all inclusive program for Maintenance. Pick an hourly price, not too high and not too low... we want them to believe the price... again, it really doesn't matter what the price is, this is just the marketing phase...get it? Say $112 pr hour. Make up a long list of things included, make sure you can "refresh" this list later, if need be. Anyhow, off to guarantee this price for 5 years (yes, 5 years, you will be LONGGONE before then, BTW) and demand upfront - 2 years payemnts based on 500 hours a year.

d- same as above, price locked in for 5 years at $129 per hour, based on 300 hours a year - pony up years one and two, now.

So, then... you have say:

100 plan-a folks sign on = 237k x 100 x 50% = almost $14M

100 plan-b folks sign on = $237k x 100 x 25% = almost $6M

100 plan-c folks sign on = $112 x 500 hours x 2yrs = just over $11M

100 plan c folks sign on = $129 x 300 hrs x 2 yrs = almost $8M

So you can collect, in advance, I figger:

$41 million in advance

Heck, I'd even promise to leave it in escrow until you open the MRO Center.

Leave the offer open for a week... it should be long enough. Let them know that after the week is up, Support will be on an hourly basis and could very well be 2 or 3 X the guaranteed prices in the plans as stated above.

Within a week after, make a deal with an MRO shop in the midwest, and claim you are open for buinsess. immediately

To all former employees reading this post, have heart! The job market for engineers in aviation is much better than you think. We are a very specialized industry and at times it seems a very small world.

Beedriver said...there is a huge amount of knowledge on this blog about aircraft and business, but it sounds like no one has been involved with designing and building computer control systems for real time control and the huge expense and complexity of doing that task.

Beedriver - good post

I don't want to sound like Gad and going into what I did years ago, but HW and SW architecture for real time systems (including flight simulators for military/NASA craft) was paying my salary.

The architecture of Avio (as I understand it from afar) is actually a very modern architecture on par with the 777/F-22/F-35 general architecture. The concept of redundant central general purpose computers controlling most ship functions (as opposed to multiple dedicated function boxes) is the future of avionics.

The problem?

As you correctly pointed out, the development of the SW in such systems is incredibly complex, with the SW having to prioritize the handling of multiple functions.

When you can amortize the costs over programs that sell tens or hundreds of billions of dollars of airplanes (777, F-22, F-35) you can put the proper resources on it. And even then, it is a multi-decade program (with all improvements and variations).

Trying to do it on a shoe string and in a couple of years is just not do-able. As Eclipse found out.

Avio should have been planned from the outset as an incremental development effort, with new function coming on line gradually. Instead, they planned as a "big bang, full function" and only when they failed (twice) did they fall back to interim releases.

ANY, and I mean, ANY good avionics SW developer would have stood up to Vern and said, "this is not do-able". We need to crawl, then walk, then run.

I still think that Avio NG can prob be salvaged, but I'd need to do a full program, architecture, and code review. It is very easy to see how troublesome (or not) it is. You just look at the effort to correct a flaw and/or add a simple function. If it can be turned around relatively clean (e.g. no adverse impact to previously implemented functions) and fast, then the system (HW, code, deve processes, people) is basically OK. Else it is in trouble.

Anyway. No rocket science. It is complex, but the processes that work are well known to a good team leader.

Now, if you have a weak avionics leader and combine that with a CEO that does not want to hear reality, it can't work.

Even I don’t want to sound like “gadfly”, but your comments are excellent. And, believe it or not, some of us would welcome knowing more about “what (you) did years ago”. The newcomers to aircraft hardware . . . and software, have attempted to over simplify the process (sometimes for less than honorable motives) . . . forgetting the solid foundations of past efforts, bought at high price in dollars and lives.

As much as some of us would even at this late date be willing to be of “real” help, the problems are akin to un-scrambling an egg . . . a “rotten” one, at that!

This is not a “put down” . . . merely facing reality!

The “seeds” of failure were sewn deep into the fabric of the beast “early on”. It’s akin to taking an old car . . . jack up the “horn”, and replace the rest of the car . . . and then for good measure, replace the “horn”.

gadfly

(It’s OK to admit failure . . . it helps build character, and a good basis to get on with life. Anyone who never made a bad decision . . . probably never made a good decision.)

If, and it is a big if, Eclipse Jet (or other alternative) gets funded as a going concern supporting, building more planes, I think there is a fair chance that you can go to for example L3 and they will take over Avio NG interim support and work on an integrated L3 flight deck replacement.

In fact, I believe, I could get L3 to PAY to PLAY. They spent a ton of money on their integrated flight deck suite and have no customers. They are desperate. In fact they did all the work for the Cirrus Jet prototype for free, with no commitment from Cirrus, just to try to win the business.

Avidyne will go out of business soon.

Honeywell is also going no-where on the low end (and may also pay to play).

There are options there. I'm not too worried about the Eclipse avionics.

If the airframe gets support and new production, the avionics issue is solvable.

Avio NG 1.5 and 1.6 have enough functionality to put it ahead of ANY currently integrated light GA suite short of G1000. It is much better than a 2007 BE90/BE200/TBM850/PC12 - not bad at all.

Upgrading to that version is a matter of getting the HW bits, code binaries and service bulletins.

Fixing bugs to the extent needed to satisfy a grounding AD should be do-able if you can fund a skeleton team plus a couple of retained consultants on an as-needed basis.

The only problem is that RP is burning time. And time is of the essence here.

Once the employees, vendors and pot-committed customers scatter, the opportunity is lost forever.

Shane or anybody who can help with this. Eclipse said they are not going to pay us for the 2 and half days we worked and the vacation they owed us. I called the ABQ work and wages, and they said i had to contact the bankruptcy courts to file against eclipse. Does anybody have the number for the courts. Thank you

“Once the employees, vendors and pot-committed customers scatter, the opportunity is lost forever.”

It would seem that the “smart ones” would have seen the train-wreck coming . . . and would have “jumped off” sometime back. If it were me, I would not be looking for a “start up” crew among those remaining. The “die-hards” are important, and have their place . . . after the company is established . . . or “re-established”, but the necessary talent probably left a long, long time back. Good talent usually learn the lesson at the first lie . . . and don’t need the possibility of a second lie. (And sorry to bring up the past, but “been there, done that!” . . . my “ex boss” served time . . . got out . . . and lived a few more years . . . very few! He came to me with a new product, actually a good product, after we started our own business. “Cash up front” got him some of our time and design . . . but old dogs don’t learn new tricks . . . the old dishonesty returned . . . but this time we didn’t get burned like the first time. He was quite likable . . . but seemed to always end up conducting dishonest business. Eclipse has all the same symptoms.)

Bottom line? . . . you said it: “the opportunity is lost forever.”

gadfly

Blogger “allen” has some good questions . . . ‘seems that investing in a DVD about the place he would have spent his vacation, and pounding the pavement looking for a new job would be far more cost effective than attempting to squeeze blood out of the “turnip”.

We've had onboard radar since NG 1.0. No radar altimeter, but TAWS pretty much obviates the need for it (and the 500' callout is priceless). XM weather continues to be via 496 or, WxWorx which I use and prefer to the Avidyne EX-500 I used to have.

1.5 has flight path presentation on the MFD and PFDs (i.e. basic map function), full autopilot coupling, ALT-CHG functionality, TOGA, Flight Director and wind vector display. SIDs, STARs, GPS roll-steering, WAAS--most of the things a guy would want, but not everything on the ultimate wishlist.

Thanks for the clarification. How many aircraft have 1.5? What are the prospects for upgrading your aircraft from 1.3 to 1.5? BTW, one uses a radar altimeter for a different reason than TAWS. Radar altimeter gives you continuous AGL readout on approach, and a bell for DH.

Baron,

"much better" must be in your eyes sitting in your Baron. Those 2007 aircraft all have TAWS and 500' annunciation, as well as all of the other features Ken mentions. I've flown a thousand hours each with PFD and EFIS 4.0 with separate airspeed, altitude and VS indicators. The differences aren't meaningful. A 496 for weather isn't integration at all.

On Tuesday, LaBarge held their Q2 2009 earnings conference call. LaBarge wrote down their entire exposure of $7.9M due to Eclipse in the quarter. Their CFO, Donald Nonnenkamp, discusses it in a way which sheds a tiny bit of light on EJI's attempts to line up suppliers ( transcript provided by Seeking Alpha ):

Eclipse Jet has indicated to us that it intends to resume production of the Eclipse E-500 aircraft and would like us to continue as a supplier. We expect to being ( sic ) negotiations in the current quarter with Eclipse Jet on a new contract to resume production of cable assemblies for the aircraft.

It's possible that the negotiations may include a payment of some portion of the Eclipse Accounts Receivable, the old company's accounts receivable. However, no such offer has been received and Eclipse Jet is not obligated to make any payments since they did not assume the receivables in the asset purchase agreement.

Eclipse Jet has shared with us a production plan that would allow consumption of the raw materials and cable assemblies that we currently have on hand. However, as of today, the company does not have a contract in place, nor have there been negotiations regarding any such contract.

Given the uncertainty surrounding the Eclipse Jet plans, and the company's future role in the production of the E-500 aircraft if any, we have written down the inventory to a level we believe we can recover through use on other programs or through the sale of the raw materials.

...we do not have confirmation that they've ( EJI ) actually closed yet on the purchase of those assets.

We expect that it would happen this week and we don't have any confirmation whether that's happened ...

The suppliers are already certified, already approved and all ready to begin production presumably immediately. So we've not had that discussion yet officially. We anticipate that that would be happening sometime during this quarter and it may lead to an agreement.

His final words on the subject:

We would have to get comfortable with their capitalization. We'll have to get comfortable with the business plan and we certainly don't want to create another write off for some point in the future.

There is also a very brief mention of Eclipse in Albany International's Q4 2008 Earnings call yesterday.

I just think its precious - Ken coming here after calling us idiots, telling us we'd be sorry, dismissing us as haters, nit picking and parsing our posts to try to make it look like we were always wrong - and now...

he's here asking the likes of US (CWMR - who calls him the Cardinal of the Church of Flyantology) for help, ideas, business plans...

I was only kidding about Avio being Windows XP - it was probably an early version of Vista (kidding again).

Actually I thought it was most likely based on Linux, BSD or Solaris Unix. Now that would be really ironic for an ex-Microsoftie to go selling free open source software and go out of business doing it.

The truth would be amusing either way.

Of note: CERN uses Linux to run everything they do, including their own 20,000 servers and the Large Hadron Collider.

On the other hand the ISS runs Windows, that is they were until it got a high-flying virus.

TBMs wrote, "BTW, one uses a radar altimeter for a different reason than TAWS."

Ya think?

I was pointing out that between the standard TAWS/EGPWS readouts and the aural "MINIMUMS" annunciation that Avio already incorporates, there is little purpose in buying the radar altimeter option; it's largely a waste of money. I cancelled it from my order after initially choosing it (I wouldn't have had it anyway of course, but this way I didn't pay for it).

Anyone who does business with anything connected with Eclipse, past or present, deserves what they get . . . there is no further room for sympathy. Stupid begets stupid!

gadfly

(But then, we have the fine example of our own politicians at work . . . like termites, chewing away at our national structure . . . chomping as fast as their little destructive teeth can bite. We truly live in interesting times!)